Depart issue pistol vs. Your own?

[ap3572001]

I looked at several articles about officer involved shootings ( on and off duty).Several times they mentioned if department issue weapon was used or officer's own handgun. Whats the difference? Why is it important?

[NorCalXJ]

i would also like to know(wannabe officer ). Maybe it is a training issue.

[Armed24-7]

It is not important, unless the officer used a weapon which is not authorized by his/her department. If an officer were to use a weapon no authorized for use by the department, an attorney can make an issue out it in a civil case. Essentially, it coes down to a "training issue" and the officer's ability to use that weapon accurately.

My department issues only 1 type/brand/model weapon but they have a large list of weapons they authorize us to purchase on our own to use while on and/or off duty. When buying our own weapon, we just have to make sure we qualify with it.

Some law enforcement agencies penalize officers who use unauthorized weapons, especialy if you shoot someone with it. It can range from formal written reprimands, to several day suspension without pay.

There would be no legitimate reason for an officer to carry an unauthorized weapon, so I have never seen any problems relating to your question.

There are exceptions; when an officer is in/at his home and something happens where deadly force is necessary. At that point, any weapon can be used (weapon of opportunity). I have several weapons at my disposal at my home and I would not hesitate to use the closest or most effection weapon regardless. Nobody would question it.

[Ron-Solo]

Originally Posted by Armed24-7

It is not important, unless the officer used a weapon which is not authorized by his/her department. If an officer were to use a weapon no authorized for use by the department, an attorney can make an issue out it in a civil case. Essentially, it coes down to a "training issue" and the officer's ability to use that weapon accurately.

My department issues only 1 type/brand/model weapon but they have a large list of weapons they authorize us to purchase on our own to use while on and/or off duty. When buying our own weapon, we just have to make sure we qualify with it.

Some law enforcement agencies penalize officers who use unauthorized weapons, especialy if you shoot someone with it. It can range from formal written reprimands, to several day suspension without pay.

There would be no legitimate reason for an officer to carry an unauthorized weapon, so I have never seen any problems relating to your question.

There are exceptions; when an officer is in/at his home and something happens where deadly force is necessary. At that point, any weapon can be used (weapon of opportunity). I have several weapons at my disposal at my home and I would not hesitate to use the closest or most effection weapon regardless. Nobody would question it.

As usual, excellent summation.

[CalCop]

I don't like my department's issue weapon, so I carry my personal handgun on duty. In my dept, you have to have the weapon inspected by the rangemaster, do some paperwork, and qualify with the weapon the same as the guys using the dept issued weapon. As long as you don't make a modification after the rangemaster inspects and approves it....it is just the same as a dept issued weapon.

[Armed24-7]

Originally Posted by Ron-Solo

As usual, excellent summation.

Now if I can learn how to type!

[friedokra]

When I was first hired by my old department years ago (not LEO any more) the training officer asked me what weapon I was going to use. I asked what they issued, and he said it was a .38 revolver, or get your own.

We had a wierd mix of handguns, most of the guys on my shift had Glocks, some had Sigs, a few 1911's, one guy even had a .45 Long Colt revolver.

The departments have specific issued firearms or authorized firearms. The same goes for the ammunition.

As a person who examines pistols from officers who are involved shooting, There is no difference as long as;

1. The pistol was issued by the department or authorized (actually I do not need to know. The investigators will find out),

2. As long as the pistol was within the factory spec, and

3. Ammunition was department issue, or purchased from the department.

If the pistol/ammunition is out of spec., I report it as is to the investigators. They will deal with the issue.

[pitbuljake]

Originally Posted by ap3572001

I looked at several articles about officer involved shootings ( on and off duty).Several times they mentioned if department issue weapon was used or officer's own handgun. Whats the difference? Why is it important?

Our department range master was reasonable for purchasing, issuing and training of all on duty weapons/ammunition. His belief, training and former law enforcement career school of thought was that all on duty weapons be of the same make, model, caliber and use the same ammunition.

For what purpose? If an officer(s) got involved in a fire fight type shooting on duty and an officer were to go down (god forbid) and could no longer fire, then any other officer still engaged could use that downed officers weapon or magazine(s) to continue the fight since we were all trained on the same weapon.

Off duty or backup weapon was not as important.

[RileyBean]

Originally Posted by Armed24-7

It is not important, unless the officer used a weapon which is not authorized by his/her department. If an officer were to use a weapon no authorized for use by the department, an attorney can make an issue out it in a civil case. Essentially, it coes down to a "training issue" and the officer's ability to use that weapon accurately.

My department issues only 1 type/brand/model weapon but they have a large list of weapons they authorize us to purchase on our own to use while on and/or off duty. When buying our own weapon, we just have to make sure we qualify with it.

Some law enforcement agencies penalize officers who use unauthorized weapons, especialy if you shoot someone with it. It can range from formal written reprimands, to several day suspension without pay.

There would be no legitimate reason for an officer to carry an unauthorized weapon, so I have never seen any problems relating to your question.

There are exceptions; when an officer is in/at his home and something happens where deadly force is necessary. At that point, any weapon can be used (weapon of opportunity). I have several weapons at my disposal at my home and I would not hesitate to use the closest or most effection weapon regardless. Nobody would question it.

Yep.

I worked for the State of ________, and our agency only issued the 92fs. I have small paws, and also prefer 4" systems for concealment when needed.

We were allowed to qualify with the agency weapon or a Glock 19. So I bought the Glock 19, had it approved by the rangemaster, qualified with it each quarter, and carried it every day.

I NEVER worried about using an "approved" weapon vrs. what the agency buys. Approved it approved.

As others have said, it's when you carry unapproved stuff you can be in a BIG jam (not only firearms, but ammo/baton/ASP/pepper spray/rifle, etc...). When in LE, ONLY carry items you are approved and qualified for (this goes from your firearm to your pepper spray).

Off duty items carried in public also needed to be approved [i.e. if "off duty" gun is different from "on duty" gun (mine were not different-so, never an issue for me personally) ].

At home - anything goes [well not "anything" (illegal NFA, etc...) - but you get what I'm saying.]

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by RileyBean

Off duty items carried in public also needed to be approved

This is not necessarily the case. The CA Penal Code allows most peace officers (beginning with PC 830.1) to carry any handgun off-duty, as long as they are authorized to carry an on-duty weapon. Some agencies require their officers to qualify with their off-duty weapon, but that is just agency policy, not law. So, if you did carry an off-duty weapon without permission, in an agency that requires you to qualify with your off-duty weapon, you would be perfectly legal....but might be open to administrative action at work.

[Armed24-7]

Originally Posted by RileyBean

Yep.

I worked for the State of ________, and our agency only issued the 92fs. I have small paws, and also prefer 4" systems for concealment when needed.

We were allowed to qualify with the agency weapon or a Glock 19. So I bought the Glock 19, had it approved by the rangemaster, qualified with it each quarter, and carried it every day.

I NEVER worried about using an "approved" weapon vrs. what the agency buys. Approved it approved.

As others have said, it's when you carry unapproved stuff you can be in a BIG jam (not only firearms, but ammo/baton/ASP/pepper spray/rifle, etc...). When in LE, ONLY carry items you are approved and qualified for (this goes from your firearm to your pepper spray).

Off duty items carried in public also needed to be approved [i.e. if "off duty" gun is different from "on duty" gun (mine were not different-so, never an issue for me personally) ].

At home - anything goes [well not "anything" (illegal NFA, etc...) - but you get what I'm saying.]

Long ago when I went through the academy, they issued us the S&W model-15 revolver. I bought and carried the S&W model 686. When my department switched to the Beretta 92F, I carried that for a while until they came up with a nice list of weapons they would authorize us to use. I then switched to a H&K USP 45, although they will authorize us to carry a large variety of 9mm or .45 caliber weapons, but some approved for off-duty and on-duty were different.

But yes, LEO's can carry any gun they want. But if you use it, you suffer whatever discipline your department dishes out for using a non-authorized weapon.

My department allows a fairly wide range of brands and models.

Originally Posted by CalCop

This is not necessarily the case. The CA Penal Code allows most peace officers (beginning with PC 830.1) to carry any handgun off-duty, as long as they are authorized to carry an on-duty weapon. Some agencies require their officers to qualify with their off-duty weapon, but that is just agency policy, not law. So, if you did carry an off-duty weapon without permission, in an agency that requires you to qualify with your off-duty weapon, you would be perfectly legal....but might be open to administrative action at work.

Whatever the Panal Code says, my department has a list of specific authorized firearms you can carry on or off duty. You have to be trained and qualified to carry the firearm you intended to carry. And, no matter which firearm you decide to carry, my department has specific ammunition that you can carry in the firearm whether it is 9mm, 45 or 38 Special.

[Armed24-7]

Originally Posted by topgun7

Whatever the Panal Code says, my department has a list of specific authorized firearms you can carry on or off duty. You have to be trained and qualified to carry the firearm you intended to carry. And, no matter which firearm you decide to carry, my department has specific ammunition that you can carry in the firearm whether it is 9mm, 45 or 38 Special.

If you don't mind me asking......do you work for LASD? I figured you must since those three calibers are the only 3 allowed by them. I work for LASD myself....I don't mind saying so.

[RileyBean]

Originally Posted by CalCop

This is not necessarily the case. The CA Penal Code allows most peace officers (beginning with PC 830.1) to carry any handgun off-duty, as long as they are authorized to carry an on-duty weapon. Some agencies require their officers to qualify with their off-duty weapon, but that is just agency policy, not law. So, if you did carry an off-duty weapon without permission, in an agency that requires you to qualify with your off-duty weapon, you would be perfectly legal....but might be open to administrative action at work.

Not penal code - department policy. The penal code won't help you if you lose your job and ability to carry. Why even risk it?

Department policy trumps penal code in this area.

[Ron-Solo]

The big kicker is, if you use an unauthorized gun and get into a shooting, the department will throw you under the bus when it comes to the civil suit.

LASD Retired here

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by topgun7

Whatever the Panal Code says, my department has a list of specific authorized firearms you can carry on or off duty. You have to be trained and qualified to carry the firearm you intended to carry. And, no matter which firearm you decide to carry, my department has specific ammunition that you can carry in the firearm whether it is 9mm, 45 or 38 Special.

The bigger the dept gets, the more communist (controlling) they become.

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by RileyBean

The penal code won't help you if you lose your job and ability to carry. Why even risk it?

No one was advocating "risking it" by carrying a weapon that your department does not approve of. In your previous statement, you implied all peace officers could only carry "approved" weapons. I was merely pointing out that not all departments have a policy requiring the firearm be "approved." When there is not a dept policy, the penal code is the only ruling policy, and it allows any handgun, as long as you are currently qualified with your duty weapon.

Originally Posted by RileyBean

Department policy trumps penal code in this area.

Dept policy never "trumps" the penal code. But I understand what you are saying...if your dept has requirements for authorized weapons...you should follow such, because the penal code will not save you from the additional requirements imposed upon you by your dept.

[SkyStorm82]

Originally Posted by Ron-Solo

The big kicker is, if you use an unauthorized gun and get into a shooting, the department will throw you under the bus when it comes to the civil suit.

LASD Retired here

What would the dept do if you used a shotgun or other long gun in a shooting while in your home?

Or are they just concerned with what you carry in public?

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by SkyStorm82

What would the dept do if you used a shotgun or other long gun in a shooting while in your home?

Nothing.

Originally Posted by SkyStorm82

Or are they just concerned with what you carry in public?

This.

[CalCop]

If you don't like the weapon the dept will let you carry...you can always get a CCW and disregard your dept's policy...they can't take away your second amendment right.

[fullrearview]

Originally Posted by CalCop

If you don't like the weapon the dept will let you carry...you can always get a CCW and disregard your dept's policy...they can't take away your second amendment right.

Not that I condone it, but per LEOSA and state law you can carry anything you want, despite department policy.

[Armed24-7]

Originally Posted by CalCop

If you don't like the weapon the dept will let you carry...you can always get a CCW and disregard your dept's policy...they can't take away your second amendment right.

That was sarcasm....right?

If you were an LEO as your username seems to imply, I wouldfind it hard to believe you were serious. LOL

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by Armed24-7

That was sarcasm....right?

If you were an LEO as your username seems to imply, I wouldfind it hard to believe you were serious. LOL

Dead serious.

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by fullrearview

Not that I condone it, but per LEOSA and state law you can carry anything you want, despite department policy.

I agree with you 100%. But CA depts have continued with their policies despite the clear intent of LEOSA. Here is what you are referring to:

• September 2007: Federal corrections officer prosecuted on disciplinary charges by the Bureau of Prisons for carrying a handgun off-duty without permission and for misusing his agency identification. Administrative Judge dismissed both charges. Court found that the officer did not need agency approval to carry under LEOSA. It also found that the officer only used the identification, but not to secure privileges unavailable to the general public. (Davis v. Dept of Justice, 2007 Merit System Protection Board Lexis 5609, 2007)
• During LEOSA construction, Representative Scott proposed a provision that LEOSA shall not be construed to supersede or limit the rules, regulations, policies, or practices of any State or local law enforcement agency. This amendment was defeated by a vote of 11 yeas to 21 nays. (H.R. Rep. No. 560, 108th Cong, 2nd Sess. 2004 p. 7)
• An officer trained only to use a firearm in a correctional setting but not trained to carry one on-duty, and not allowed to carry off-duty, is still covered by LEOSA if they meet all requirements of LEOSA. (H.R. Rep. No. 560, 108th Cong., 2nd Sess. 2004 p. 53-62)
• “The protection provided by LEOSA is simply not reduced or eliminated because an otherwise qualified officer fails to obtain permission from his department to use the weapon; (People v. Drew Peterson)
• CA DOJ says, “On-duty restrictions placed by the department appear to be permissible. Off-duty restrictions appear to be superceded by this Act.” http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/leosiss.pdf
• FBI says: “It is unclear whether LEOSA overrides an agency's ability to limit an officer's authority to carry a personally owned handgun off duty as part of off-duty restriction policies. Some agencies have continued to enforce such policies. Arguably, because LEOSA explicitly overrides state law provisions (except those addressing state facilities and property), and the head of an executive agency is given power by way of state law, it would appear that LEOSA would override off duty restriction policies. However, agencies with such a policy and officers working within these agencies should seek guidance and clarification in regard to the legality of such policies. http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/pu..._duty_firearms
• FOP says: “If you are a qualified active law enforcement officer, you are legally able to carry a firearm under 18 USC 926B. There may be agencies which enforce or adopt policies, rules, regulations, or employment conditions which discourage or punish officers which choose to carry while off-duty, but such actions do not mean that the officer cannot carry lawfully under the provisions of this statute. Your agency, however, can prohibit you from carrying your agency-issued weapon, which is the property of the governmental entity. http://www.fop.net/legislative/issue...8/hr218faq.pdf

[Armed24-7]

A CCW would be worthless because it would not save you from possible civil issues, nor would it save you from disciplinary action by your department.

Besides, I doubt a peace officer as defined in 830.1 PC would get approved fro a CCW while working as an active peace officer since you have no need for one until you retire.

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by Armed24-7

A CCW would be worthless because it would not save you from possible civil issues, nor would it save you from disciplinary action by your department.

A CCW has never been argued as a removal of all civil liability. Neither does a LEO carrying under the authority of the Penal Code, have all civil liability removed.

Originally Posted by Armed24-7

Besides, I doubt a peace officer as defined in 830.1 PC would get approved fro a CCW while working as an active peace officer since you have no need for one until you retire.

I know a few. CCW holders are more clearly exempted from the federal Gun Free School Zone than are CA peace officers.

Originally Posted by Armed24-7

If you don't mind me asking......do you work for LASD? I figured you must since those three calibers are the only 3 allowed by them. I work for LASD myself....I don't mind saying so.

Yes. Many members here know it, too.
2 years 4 months and 18 days to go...before I hang my hat.

[Ron-Solo]

Originally Posted by CalCop

If you don't like the weapon the dept will let you carry...you can always get a CCW and disregard your dept's policy...they can't take away your second amendment right.

Originally Posted by fullrearview

Not that I condone it, but per LEOSA and state law you can carry anything you want, despite department policy.

I don't know about other departments, but with LASD if you use an unauthorized weapon in a shooting, not only will you be subject to disciplinary action for violation of Department Policy, you are on your own in any civil action. Regardless of what LEOSA says, the lack of support in a civil action will be devastating, and the other side will use that lack of support against you. LASD authorizes such a wide variety of weapons there is little need to carry an unauthorized weapon.


If you are in your home, you can use anything available.

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by Ron-Solo

Regardless of what LEOSA says, the lack of support in a civil action will be devastating, and the other side will use that lack of support against you.

I hear ya there. Since we 830.1 and 830.2 cops are considered on-duty 24-7...the dept will back you if you follow their policy. I don't want to pay for my defense....let the dept lawyers foot the bill!

[RileyBean]

Originally Posted by CalCop

No one was advocating "risking it" by carrying a weapon that your department does not approve of. In your previous statement, you implied all peace officers could only carry "approved" weapons. I was merely pointing out that not all departments have a policy requiring the firearm be "approved." When there is not a dept policy, the penal code is the only ruling policy, and it allows any handgun, as long as you are currently qualified with your duty weapon.

Dept policy never "trumps" the penal code. But I understand what you are saying...if your dept has requirements for authorized weapons...you should follow such, because the penal code will not save you from the additional requirements imposed upon you by your dept.

When I said off duty weapons needed to be approved, I was only speaking of my department. Sorry for any confusion.

[RileyBean]

Originally Posted by CalCop

If you don't like the weapon the dept will let you carry...you can always get a CCW and disregard your dept's policy...they can't take away your second amendment right.

Wow - you have HUGE stones!!!

Every agency I know would give you BIG, BIG problems if you got into a shooting with an unauthorized weapon (regardless of the penal code, CCW, or anything else) - not to mention hanging you to dry on the civil end.

[CalCop]

Originally Posted by RileyBean

Wow - you have HUGE stones!!!

I don't know about all that....I carry a dept approved weapon off-duty. But, my dept has a long list, and I love my off-duty carry weapon.

Originally Posted by RileyBean

Every agency I know would give you BIG, BIG problems if you got into a shooting with an unauthorized weapon (regardless of the penal code, CCW, or anything else) - not to mention hanging you to dry on the civil end.

The agency cannot regulate one of your civil rights if you are carrying pursuant to a CCW while off-duty. If they could regulate what you CCW pursuant to a CCW permit...they might as well tell you where you can attend church.

However, I think carrying according to your dept's wishes is a good idea, if for no other reason than to have their attorneys back you if you were acting within their guidelines.

[URBAN COMMANDO]

Originally Posted by Ron-Solo

I don't know about other departments, but with LASD if you use an unauthorized weapon in a shooting, not only will you be subject to disciplinary action for violation of Department Policy, you are on your own in any civil action. Regardless of what LEOSA says, the lack of support in a civil action will be devastating, and the other side will use that lack of support against you. LASD authorizes such a wide variety of weapons there is little need to carry an unauthorized weapon.


If you are in your home, you can use anything available.

same rules for LAPD

Thanks Ron